Dan Schmidt

Step #1: Use your current qualifications to get a job in an area of a business where there is strategic white space. This implies that the business is stagnating in a key realm due to lack of clearly defined vision and there isn't a clear person whose role it is to define and execute the absent strategy.

Step #2: Fill the strategic white space. This implies articulating the need to define a strategy in this key realm, driving the process to do so in collaboration with others, and connecting the necessary dots to implement the strategy you defined.

Step #3: At this point, you will be operating as the product manager in addition to the responsibilities of your original job. However, assuming a healthy organization, it should be straightforward to make the case to management that the business would benefit from you focusing exclusively on product management, while handing off your previous responsibilities to someone else. They should recognize that enabling you to completely pour yourself into the product manager role is a means to take the business a fundamental step forward.

See question on Quora

Given a database of entities (companies, products, etc.), what's the best automated tool for tracking the level of social web buzz on each item?

Sun, 13 Mar 2011 01:01:07 GMT

Dan Schmidt added a question.

0 Answers

Write an answer on Quora

Windows Azure Marketplace DataMarket

Wed, 09 Mar 2011 19:57:25 GMT

https://datamarket.azure.com/

What are the most effective ways to raise awareness of an API and motivate developers to use it?

Tue, 08 Mar 2011 23:13:51 GMT

Dan Schmidt added a question.

0 Answers

Write an answer on Quora

How bad is facebook comments going to crush Disqus and other like commenting platforms?

Thu, 03 Mar 2011 07:12:42 GMT

In Facebook Comments: Dan Schmidt followed a question.

4 Answers

See question on Quora

Should it be an important priority to devote public funds and/or attention to coming up with asteroid deflection technology?

Sun, 27 Feb 2011 05:12:18 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

0 Answers

Write an answer on Quora

How do you divide your typical day as a product manager to juggle between different responsibilities?

Sun, 27 Feb 2011 04:37:33 GMT

In Product Management: Dan Schmidt added an answer.

Dan Schmidt, Director of Product Management for GoodGuide (h...

I believe that the primary thing for a product manager to prioritize above all else is keeping yourself in a situation where you dictate what you and what your team does. This entails spending the time to think deeply about the vision and strategy for evolving your product, and socializing your plan with management and your team so that they are fully bought in, understand what you're doing, and trust you to execute it. This takes quite a bit of time and focus.

When I say "dictate what you do," it should not imply that you are closed to ideas from team members and unresponsive to directives from management. Instead, openness to input from others is a crucial ingredient in developing an optimal strategy. However, you must be the clear owner of your product; the primary synthesizer, filterer, and communicator of ideas pertaining to the strategy. When you do what's necessary to maintain this state (which is an ongoing effort), all other prioritization unfolds naturally based on the tactics of applying your strategy and the roles of other team members.

The primary difference I've seen between product managers who thrive versus those who struggle is whether they dictate what they do. Those who do not, end up on a treadmill of executing other people's projects that lack sufficient unity and direction to make meaningful impact.

See question on Quora

Why is Barnes and Noble performing well as a business while Borders is near (or has even reached) bankruptcy?

Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:17:44 GMT

In Borders Books: Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Mark Evans

This is a question that many of us at Borders asked ourselves frequently and I think the answer is not a simple one. As someone who has given this a tremendous amount of thought and was Director of Merchandise Planning & Analysis for many years, I've outlined my assessment below:

Failure to adequately address the internet sales channel and the subsequent ebook market. Specifically, the decision to outsource Borders.com to Amazon.com. To be fair, Borders.com was costing the company millions of dollars in losses each year ($20m I think when they decided to outsource) and one could argue that the outsourcing solution was a case of letting the most efficient etailing organization (Amazon.com) handle the job and turn a big negative into a profitable business. In the short-term, this saved a lot of money. In the long run, the internet is too important to outsource in this manner and Borders' branding, multi-channel strategy, and customer base suffered. They also dropped the ball on ebooks, but by the time this became an issue they were just trying to figure out how to keep the whole house from burning down around them, so I find it more understandable.
Poor real estate strategy - Borders leased space that was too large, the storefronts did not compare well to B&N, and they were complacent in picking and relocating existing stores to the best locations. Some of this is subjective as I don't have great data to back this up - just my own educated assessment based on observation.
Over-investment in music - while this was a big plus for Borders in the early to mid 90's, it was a disaster in the long run. This is why the stores were too big once the music business cratered - stores were sized and modeled to provide a large music CD business which largely disappeared. In addition, infrastructure was sized to support this business, including a dedicated warehouse distribution facility. This last part has been addressed over time, but soaked up money, time, and energy. Music was also part of what made Borders a destination for many customers, so when music sales tanked, other product categories' sales suffered as well.
Over-reliance on assortment size to compete as opposed to efficient operations - Borders was renowned for its wide and quality assortment of titles. The very large assortment size was an advantage early on before Amazon. However, by its very nature the internet was better at quickly and efficiently connecting customers with obscure titles and bringing the "long tail' to market. Thus, competing on assortment size was especially vulnerable to internet retailing and Borders suffered disproportionately as the "long tail" customers abandoned them.
Failure to build efficient systems and processes - While Borders legendary "expert system" was considered cutting edge and an advantage early on, the company failed to successfully build upon this foundation and create new, better assortment, replenishment, and supply chain systems and processes to keep pace with the changing state of technology and efficient retail operations. B&N invested considerable time/energy/money through the 90's in systems and processes. To provide one example, a lower ranked title that sells out in a B&N will be replenished from a central warehouse within 2-3 days. The same process could take up to 16 weeks for Borders. Borders sought to upgrade systems with two large efforts in the 00's: first one was a home grown effort called Common Systems. Second was a "buy and integrate" project to implement Retek and E3. Both failed spectacularly. The Retek effort dramatically hurt the Walden chain, the only business unit that was managed by the system. With both of these efforts, large sums of money and, perhaps more importantly, human resources and time were squandered.
Branding failure - In addition to the Borders.com problem, Borders never reached the mindshare that Barnes & Noble did for a variety of reasons. Also, Barnes & Noble secured the exclusive U.S. Starbucks partnership, a major branding and traffic-driving win for them.

See question on Quora

Why is Barnes & Noble performing well as a business while Borders is near (or has even reached) bankruptcy?

Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:17:44 GMT

In Borders Books: Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Mark Evans

Failure to adequately address the internet sales channel and the subsequent ebook market. Specifically, the decision to outsource Borders.com to Amazon.com. To be fair, Borders.com was costing the company millions of dollars in losses each year ($20m I think when they decided to outsource) and one could argue that the outsourcing solution was a case of letting the most efficient etailing organization (Amazon.com) handle the job and turn a big negative into a profitable business. In the short-term, this saved a lot of money. In the long run, the internet is too important to outsource in this manner and Borders' branding, multi-channel strategy, and customer base suffered. They also dropped the ball on ebooks, but by the time this became an issue they were just trying to figure out how to keep the whole house from burning down around them, so I find it more understandable.
Poor real estate strategy - Borders leased space that was too large, the storefronts did not compare well to B&N, and they were complacent in picking and relocating existing stores to the best locations. Some of this is subjective as I don't have great data to back this up - just my own educated assessment based on observation.
Over-investment in music - while this was a big plus for this in the early to mid 90's, this was a disaster in the long run. This is basically why the stores were too big once the music business cratered. So, stores were sized and modeled to provide a large music CD business which largely disappeared. In addition, infrastructure was sized to support this, including a dedicated warehouse distribution facility. This last part has been addressed over time, but soaked up money, time, and energy. Note that music was also part of what made Borders a destination for many customers, so when music sales tanked, other product categories' sales suffered as well.
Over-reliance on assortment size to compete as opposed to efficient operations - Borders was renowned for its wide and quality assortment of titles. The very large assortment size was an advantage early on before Amazon. However, by its very nature the internet was better at quickly and efficiently connecting customers with obscure titles and bringing the "long tail' to market. Thus, Borders suffered disproportionately as the "long tail" customers abandoned them. Thus, competing on assortment size was especially vulnerable to internet retailing.
Failure to build efficient systems and processes - While Borders legendary "expert system" was considered cutting edge and an advantage early on, the company failed to successfully build upon this foundation and create new, better assortment, replenishment, and supply chain systems and processes to keep pace with the changing state of technology and efficient retail operations. B&N invested considerable time/energy/money through the 90's in systems and processes. To provide one example, a lower ranked title that sells out in a B&N will be replenished from a central warehouse within 2-3 days. The same process could take up to 16 weeks for Borders. Borders sought to upgrade systems with two large efforts in the 00's: first one was a home grown effort called Common Systems. Second was a "buy and integrate" project to implement Retek and E3. Both failed spectacularly. The Retek effort dramatically hurt the Walden chain, the only business unit that was managed by the system. With both of these efforts, large sums of money and, perhaps more importantly, human resources and time were squandered.
Branding failure - In addition to the Borders.com problem, Borders never reached the mindshare that Barnes & Noble did for a variety of reasons. Also, Barnes & Noble secured the exclusive U.S. Starbucks partnership, a major branding win for them.

See question on Quora

Levchin and Gurley Say That Next Big Company Will Capture The Interest Graph

Thu, 17 Feb 2011 21:26:22 GMT

http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/17/levchin-and-gurley-say-that-next-big-company-will-capture-the-interest-graph/

What are the pros and cons of using StumbleUpon advertisements to drive traffic to a new product?

Wed, 16 Feb 2011 22:05:47 GMT

Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Peter Armstrong, I work with seven ad agencies from the publishe...

I just recently became aware that it was possible to run ads on StumbleUpon. I've been running a campaign for three weeks. The pros that I see so far are:

1. It is kind of like priming a pump. Running the ads increases the view count, likes, favorites and reviews for a link. As these numbers increase it causes people who are browsing categories on StumbleUpon who may see the link to infer that the link is worth visiting. Also as people favorite the site it gets pushed out to their followers. Both of these seem to result in an increase in "free stumbles" as the campaign progresses.

2. Expanding your audience and reaching "new visitors." In our case the new visitor rate from StumbleUpon is higher than Google Adwords and organic search (90% new visitors vs. 55% with Adwords).

3. It is targetable by topic, age, gender, and location.

4. I agree with Sean Ferguson who noted that it is easy, cheap traffic. I am paying 5 cents a click currently.

The con mentioned about high bounce rates is certainly a possibility depending on the site or page you are advertising and whether or not it lends itself to a subsequent action on the site (I am seeing a 33% bounce rate). There has to be some sort of hook that draws a person in on the page or else you will waste your money! Keep in mind people are clicking the "stumble" button and up pops your site. Within just a few seconds they will have decided if it is interesting enough to look at for awhile or click "stumble" again and move on to the next site. I think pages with humor / entertainment tend to do better than general / informational pages.

Every website is different. What works well for one site may not work well for another.

See question on Quora

What mobile app provides the best in-store user experience?

Mon, 14 Feb 2011 07:05:58 GMT

Dan Schmidt added a question.

0 Answers

Write an answer on Quora

What is the best system to use for an in store points redemption system through a mobile app, that provides a discount in exchange for game points at the point of purchase?

Mon, 14 Feb 2011 06:58:38 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

0 Answers

Write an answer on Quora

What are popular mobile platforms for retailer marketing / in-store experience?

Mon, 14 Feb 2011 06:57:19 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

2 Answers

See question on Quora

Which are the successful examples of companies whose business model is based on selling data?

Wed, 09 Feb 2011 06:09:47 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

4 Answers

See question on Quora

What level of coding experience should a good product manager have?

Mon, 07 Feb 2011 06:25:49 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

3 Answers

See question on Quora

Dan Schmidt voted up a post by James Hritz.

Sun, 06 Feb 2011 22:30:25 GMT

Why Quora & Social Media Experts Don't Mix

Reposted from the The Quora Review

As the Quora user base has grown, along with much praise, has come some criticism. Specifically, many critics view Quora as a snobby, clubby, and intellectually elitist place. It seems much of the loudest criticism about Quora and its community and moderation policies come from a Twitter ecosystem creature known as the “social media expert/maven.”

If you are even a casual user of Twitter, I am sure you have seen the social media expert more than a few times. The profile looks something like this: Following 20,545, Followed by 20,100, and 10,000+ Tweets. This user’s tweet stream is populated by a steady stream of retweets and tweets of well-publicized articles from publishers like Techcrunch, Scoble, GigaOm, etc. Up until December, this creature was conspicuously absent from the Quora community. Before I go on, lets be clear that this is not an attack on those of you who would call yourselves “social media experts.” For reasons I will lay out, these users do play a valuable role in the Twitter ecosystem.

On Twitter, what are “social media experts” doing and why are they doing it? Who in their right mind could possibly follow any more than a few hundred users on Twitter and still have a valuable user experience? Well, the answer lies in one of the tried and true business models of the internet: arbitrage. Huh? What could “social media experts” possibly be arbitraging? Simple, they are reputation arbitrageurs. This statement should not be taken to mean that these people are not intelligent, substantive or even have great personal reputations. What it does mean is this: these individuals are using Twitter as a personal marketing tool to build and expand their personal reputation either for career advancement (e.g. demonstrating thought leadership) or generating traffic in an effort to monetize a personal blog or website. Sometimes, it is both.

How does reputation arbitrage work? The first step for many of these users is to setup (through Twitterfeed , Hootsuite, etc) RSS feeds that will automatically tweet articles as they are posted. These users also may choose to auto retweet certain users (e.g. Scoble, Malik Om or Michael Arrington). Once they have their feeds in place and are showing a stream full of solid links, they then begin the process of aggressively following and unfollowing users to create an audience of people who show an interest in the same subject they want to establish or expand their reputation. In this case, it’s social networking. (to Twitter’s credit, they have significantly cracked down on aggressive following behavior). The reputation arbitrageur then hopes by tweeting and retweeting sources with strong reputations, users will read these tweets, associate the source with the reputation arbitrageur and quite possibly even retweet the link. With each tweet, the reputation arbitrageur manages to claim a small piece of credibility from what is essentially a costless and riskless transaction. It doesn’t cost them anything (other than time in curating followers) and they never assume risk of an opinion since they generally select highly credible, semi non-controversial, mainstream sources. It’s the Twitter way of building reputation and influence.

When these user types arrived on Quora, based on their tried and true methods from Twitter, they quite naturally expected the same dynamics to hold true. Whoa! Not so fast. What they actually found was quite the opposite. During the weeks of Quora’s most recent growth spurt, I found myself followed by some users who were following literally 100s of users, but followed by no one. In all fairness, I am sure some of this aggressive Quora following by new users was due in some part to the sign up process, but the “social media expert” in me also knows that many of these new “social media expert” users expected an auto follow back rate commensurate with their Twitter experience (on Twitter, you can expect about a 30%ish follow back rate). This lack of follow back by established Quora users, in a large part I believe, led to much of the criticism that Quora is a snobbish, elitist club. I am certain some egos were bruised.

Why didn’t established Quora users follow back? Well, Quora is a community where you are expected to contribute. You can contribute questions or answers, both are good, but at a most basic level, the expectation is you will contribute. Voting up an answer, sending Thanks for an answer or following a question is simply not enough to inspire the experienced Quora user to follow back. I have a healthy following on Quora, contribute frequently, and yet some power users of Quora who up vote many of my answers still do not feel inclined to follow me back. Am I offended? No, of course not. For whatever reason, our interests do not intersect as far as they are concerned. This is fine. This Quora community reality does not sit well with the “social media expert” who is seeking to build credibility cheaply and efficiently.

If you buy the analogy many of these “social media expert” users are reputation arbitrageurs, then the main hurdle for these users in the adoption of Quora is simply a question of transaction costs. The transaction costs on Twitter are low (e.g. hitting the retweet button), but the transaction costs and risk on Quora are high. To succeed on Quora, you must generate thoughtful and interesting questions and/or answers. This is hard and there is no script to do it at scale, although, some users have tried to game up votes using things like Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Furthermore, there is infinitely more risk to reputation, than the “social media expert” is willing to take on. They don’t want to take the chance that their answer isn’t the most up voted, shown to be incorrect, or perceived to be less than insightful. Why would they take on the time, effort, and risk involved in being successful on Quora, if they could just keep hitting the retweet button on Twitter?

The intention is not to malign “social media experts.” There is nothing morally or otherwise wrong with what they are doing. In fact, I would argue, at least for Twitter, they serve a very useful purpose. Like arbitrageurs in financial markets who provide liquidity and price efficiency, these reputation arbitrageurs perform a similar function in the Twitter ecosystem. Their desire to increase their own reputation leads them to keep the information flow on Twitter going to the benefit of a large number of users. The price they charge is the small slice of credibility they gain anytime someone reads or retweets their tweet from a credible source.

While many would still categorize Quora as just a Q&A site, I think they are missing a large, but still opaque trend in social media. That trend is one where users are diversifying their social media activity from using purely low transaction cost services (Twitter, Facebook) to higher transaction cost services like Quora, Tumblr or Namesake. Regardless of how you feel about Quora, its content, or its community, the trend of deeper, longer format conversations in social media and how users adapt to it is going to be something of interest.

Dan Schmidt voted up a post by James Hritz.

Sun, 06 Feb 2011 22:30:25 GMT

Why Quora & Social Media Experts Don't Mix

What are the best tools for finding blind spots in your learning network?

Sun, 30 Jan 2011 07:29:48 GMT

Dan Schmidt added a question.

0 Answers

Write an answer on Quora

What are the best tools for finding blind spots in your learning network?

Sun, 30 Jan 2011 07:29:48 GMT

Dan Schmidt added a question.

0 Answers

Write an answer on Quora

How much time should people in the tech industry invest in keeping up to date on world affairs?

Sun, 30 Jan 2011 07:13:02 GMT

Dan Schmidt added a question.

1 Answer

See question on Quora

How much time should people in the tech industry invest in keeping up to date on world affairs?

Sun, 30 Jan 2011 07:13:02 GMT

Dan Schmidt added a question.

1 Answer

See question on Quora

How can I get better at color (for website design)?

Sat, 29 Jan 2011 20:34:55 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

4 Answers

See question on Quora

How can I get better at color (for website design)?

Sat, 29 Jan 2011 20:34:55 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

4 Answers

See question on Quora

Force of Nature :: Site Installations by Ten Japanese Artists

Sat, 29 Jan 2011 08:01:31 GMT

http://halsey.cofc.edu/exhibitions/2006/05_fon/09_yamamoto10.html

If you find a $100 bill on the sidewalk, are you allowed to take it?

Fri, 28 Jan 2011 06:25:59 GMT

In Legal Advice: Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Ani Ravi, Law Student

There's an ancient legal principle: nemo est praedo qui relictum tollit - it translates, roughly, to Finders Keepers, Losers Weepers. You're legally in the clear taking lost property at common law - all you're required to do is give it back to the owner if he shows up asking for it. Not likely for a small (or even large) amount of money.

The modern statutory framework doesn't require that you do anything if you happen on lost property, but if you do decide to take it, you're obliged to take it to a police office or similar place, where they'll hold on to it for a while, and then give it back to you. In California, which is similar enough to other states that it's a good example, you don't have to do anything if the property is worth less than $100, but if it's more you need to take it to the police station, which will hold on to it for 90 days and give it back to you if it's still unclaimed. If the property is worth more than $250, after 90 days have elapsed, the cops will put an advertisement in the newspaper; after that fails, you'll get your property. See http://www.animallaw.info/statut...

Given, though, that there's no way to legally deter taking of lost property, the only effective laws are ethical ones. I'd urge you to think of yet another old Latin phrase: quod tibi non vis fieri, ne aliis feceris - the golden rule, and think about what you'd want done if you lost a pile of cash, and then do that.

See question on Quora

If you find a $100 bill on the sidewalk, are you allowed to take it?

Fri, 28 Jan 2011 06:25:59 GMT

In Legal Advice: Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Ani Ravi, Law Student

How will Facebook users react to "Sponsored Stories"?

Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:22:51 GMT

Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Philip Zigoris, Engineers on Facebook Ads

Good answers so far, thought I'd add a couple things.

I think the salient question is: are users getting enough value out of connecting/interacting with a business on FB that they would not want to give that up in light of the Sponsored Stories product? I believe the answer is yes because (1) they are getting real value and (2) Sponsored Stories are a natural extension of the newsfeed so, as Daniel points out, they are not very disruptive.

Keep in mind that in its current form, its not actually promoting mentions of products but more formal interactions, i.e. checkins, connections, app publications. Maybe they are claiming a deal, maybe they are letting their friends know that they are at a bar, maybe they are celebrating castrating their 100th horse in Farmville. However trivial it may seem at times, people already have reasons for interacting with brands/businesses on FB and as long as they are getting value out of these actions, I think they'll continue to do so knowing that their friends might also see the story on the right hand side.

To respond to Daniel's point about brand value: Part of what makes this product so exciting for Facebook is that it is so well integrated into the Facebook experience. It is perfectly aligned with users intentions when they come to the site: to see what their friends are doing. Users understand these stories, they trust them more, and this makes the impression of a story (versus an ad) much more valuable for the brand. So contrary to one of Daniel's point, its because they're non-disruptive that they work so well for advertisers.

See question on Quora

How will Facebook users react to "Sponsored Stories"?

Wed, 26 Jan 2011 08:22:51 GMT

Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Philip Zigoris, Engineers on Facebook Ads

Good answers so far, thought I'd add a couple things.

I think the salient question is: are users getting enough value out of connecting/interacting with a business on FB that they would not want to give that up in light of the Sponsored Stories product? I believe the answer is yes because (1) they are getting real value and (2) Sponsored Stories are a natural extension of the newsfeed so, as Daniel points out, they are not very disruptive.

Keep in mind that in its current form, its not actually promoting mentions of products but more formal interactions, i.e. checkins, connections, app publications. Maybe they are claiming a deal, maybe they are letting their friends know that they are at a bar, maybe they are celebrating castrating their 100th horse in Farmville. However trivial it may seem at times, people already have reasons for interacting with brands/businesses on FB and as long as they are getting value out of these actions, I think they'll continue to do so knowing that their friends might also see the story on the right hand side.

One thing I've seen come up in here and in comments on articles is an idea of profit sharing with users. My personal take on this is that its very difficult to create the right incentives without diluting the product. I think most users would prefer a world where their friends aren't publishing insincere messages about "HOW F*ING AMAZING IS LYSOL!" or whoever is paying them that day.

To respond to Daniel's point about brand value: Part of what makes this product so exciting for Facebook is that it is so well integrated into the Facebook experience. It is perfectly aligned with users intentions when they come to the site: to see what their friends are doing. Users understand these stories, they trust them more, and this makes the impression of a story (versus an ad) much more valuable for the brand. So contrary to one of Daniel's point, its because they're non-disruptive that they work so well for advertisers.

See question on Quora

What are the key signs in a business that you, the Product Manager, should move on?

Tue, 25 Jan 2011 05:53:35 GMT

Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Anon User

Having been through these situations a few places over the past couple of years, here are the key warning signs I'd be looking out for:

Attrition - Forced or Otherwise - Are the "smart' people exiting the company, no matter how nice a face is being put on it? Are founders starting to move on to "new opportunities"? Are exits no longer announced, but just silently executed?

Blockaded Communication - Are communication channels being stymied, either internally or externally? Is Sales guarding its territory like a bulldog protecting its bone? Has marketing effectively stopped engaging the customers and the market? Are your customer communications becoming hum-drum and empty of any "real" actionable information?

Customize THIS! - Has "strategy" become an empty word? Is there any real work going on that's forward-looking beyond the current, and maybe next, quarter? Is everything about making sure "X" customer is happy, and ignoring "Y","Z", and "A"? Are specific revenue drivers taking a backseat to serving your market effectively?

Competitive INdistinction - Can your exec team articulate what it is that makes the company unique? Do your customers know what your company does, and why they should be using your products and/or services? Is the organization structured such that the strengths of the company are maximized and the weaknesses minimized?

Reorg Hell - How many times has the reporting structure changed in the past year? Are problems being hidden by the shuffle, rather than openly discussed and challenged? Are "consultants" stepping in where executive management should be engaging directly?

I'm sure there are many more factors, but these seem to be recurring themes across the several dysfunctional organizations I've worked with in recent years.

See question on Quora

What are the key signs in a business that you, the Product Manager, should move on?

Tue, 25 Jan 2011 05:53:35 GMT

Dan Schmidt voted up an answer.

Anon User

How do you build a community of users that give high quality comments on a website?

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:31:48 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

13 Answers

See question on Quora

How do you build a community of users that give high quality comments on a website?

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 23:31:48 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

8 Answers

See question on Quora

Is there a need for for different genres of social networks? Are different social networks needed for different hobbies or lifestyles?

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 07:14:00 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

1 Answer

See question on Quora

Is there a need for for different genres of social networks? Are different social networks needed for different hobbies or lifestyles?

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 07:14:00 GMT

Dan Schmidt followed a question.

1 Answer

See question on Quora