Unfortunately, sometimes all you can do is keep it active until other users begin posting too.
AskHistorians
QUESTIONS
- Be civil.
- Be specific.
- Historical topic must be from at least 20 years ago.
- Post questions in the title. Elaboration is for the text box.
RESPONSES
- Be civil.
- Provide comprehensive answers.
- Sources are welcome, but not required.
askhistorians is a community for academic answers to questions about history. Polls, opinions, bigotry, grammar pedantry, and personal insults will be removed.
Maybe have a partnership with /r/askhistorians to link to each others?
I only have my opinion to share, no facts. So what follows should only be considered as such: a personal opinion.
First, there is the lack of active users everywhere in the Fediverse. That being a given, there is not much anyone in any community can do against that save by spending even more time than they already are, trying to make the community more active and welcoming... but we all have limited time, anbd even among our limited number of users a large proportion is not here to participate at all (which is ok). So...
I sincerely think the main issue that is driving away so many potential new users is the Fediverse itself insisting on being so politicized, and mostly from a single side of the political spectrum. This is a huge disappointment for quite a few of the users I invited to try the place. There are not enough of them to make any conclusion but still, it was a recurring complaint (including from me, even though I did not give up on the Fediverse despite my initial desire to flew away from that constant angry noise)
I would love for the Fediverse as a whole to decide it may be worth trying to reduce political noise, and see how it impacts the amount of new users that are staying and leaving. At least, as a temporary experience.
Also, there may be fear. The fear of posting and of being judged (and even shamed) for asking a dumb question or for asking a question that irked those politically minded users I already mentioned. teh same users that are more than willing and happy to judge and to punish anybody that would dare not fit or agree with their world view and ethics.
The other issue could be AI. I mean, why bother asking question to an actual human that could potentially be wanting to punish your for a poorly worded question or for a question they would deem offensive, when one ask the exact same question to an always supportive AI and get something remotely looking like an usable answer? At least at first glance.
As an admin I would focus my energy on rekindling, today more than ever, our appreciation for open discussions, formal or informal, serious or not so serious... Offensive or not offensive. Encouraging all of us to not just fine with but be happy that we don't all share the same ideas and the same values... which is what I fear the prevalence of AI (and our failure as keeping an open debate as human beings) will end-up creating for the newer generations: some kind of universally shared slop, something that will offend almost no one (or will quickly correct it) and more worryingly not dare say anything remotely challenging to anyone.
History should and could be a place to resist that.
I would, honestly, ban any and all trolls and anti-fans. I would advocate for middle-ground discussions that are more intellectual than the idiocy that we see 'round these parts.
This is why I tend to get downvoted a lot, because I'm too intellectual for a hivemind. I'm too different to where I just get completely attacked with ad-hominem attacks. This isn't about me being intellectual, however, as I advocate for it.
Just read my writing, and you'll see why.