Feature Requests

13 votes

Associate an existing Group during the create space process

Space Owners will have the option to link private Group while they are creating a public Space. That group will be associated with the Space in a new tab. That group tab will probably need an editable name, so people can describe their groups in a way that makes sense for their use case.

In Development Category: Core Feature Jill Carrie shared this idea


  1. To make this flexible I would suggest just allowing users to link groups that they create separately. That way the groups could be public, private, or hidden; and have multiple groups if the Space owner wants. Don’t constrain it to just private groups. Also, creating a group has a number of steps that I don’t think need to be automated inside spaces. Plus group admins and group membership may not be automatically the same as the Space followers, I’d see it more as an option (follow us, and you can also join a customer group). Create the group(s) separately then link it. I’m envisioning the UI once connected in Space would be a tab that has a little group directory of one or more attached groups. Use the group directory shortcode to display it with selected groups relevant for the Space. This would also allow for suggested groups from the Space owner. Like I’m a boat supplier. I set up a space that you can follow my company news. I have a group for actual customers to interact. Also, I have some additional suggested groups that I did not create linked to my Space for a specific marina or a topic group on power boating or marine environment issues that I think my followers might be interested in. It’s a way to add value as a Space owner by referring people to other relevant groups within the community. Keep it general purpose.

  2. I’ve been kind of up in the air about the use of linking a group with a space, at least for my community but also just trying to imagine the use cases more broadly. They both have activity feeds and allow for users to “join,” but the biggest difference is that groups have discussion boards and Spaces are categorically different from a social group and include a number of features meant for organizational listings.

    Reading through the comments here I can see that there is a use for some connections to be made. However, given the overlap in functionality the original poster sounds like they could just-as-well use a discussion board in the Space and not a full group, while the other replier here sounds like he could use a Spaces Widget for “Groups Following” or even “Similar Spaces” in addition to an optional discussion board tab.

    The problem that I see arising with this feature is that there will then be at least 2 activity feeds associated with the organization/space, which will then have to be managed/moderated, and their followers will then have to sign up to both or be signed up to multiple groups. Another issue will arise when the monetization feature is launched, because you are basically giving potential paying users a choice between purchasing a Space – with an activity feed – or just launching a public group for free – with an activity feed.

    This feature request at best blurs the line between the role of social groups and spaces and unnecessarily duplicates shared functionality between them. Instead we should want to emphasize that groups and Spaces serve very different purposes and promote spaces as the appropriate form for organizations to take. If anything, discussion boards or even a simple spaces widget would far better serve this purpose. I vote NO on this feature request.

    • Re: Indigetal … So …. Why come on here and say I don’t need what I asked for … ? Cause I do, need what I asked for … which is private groups for those with public spaces … And no, a discussion board will not work. Let’s say I have a company or a team or a teacher, they have a fan page style “space” as their public facing page and while they are setting that up, I’d like the option to create a bb group(s) & forum(s) that will be associated with that space, which they can use privately, for organizing their own team members, projects, events or classes. This stuff has nothing to do with their public facing space, but utilizes bb’s plugin integration capabilities in a group … and it will be easier and more clear for them if they can set everything up all at once and have all of their stuff in one place, with a simple tabbed interface, then having to know to go through multiple set up walkthroughs and having their stuff in different places.

  3. Hi Jill,
    The issues that I had with the proposed feature are clearly explained in my reply. How is your use case then not served by the other related feature that I proposed as an alternative option, i.e. a widget listing or section in the about page related groups? Of course private groups would not be publicly viewable in that same widget or section in the about page. Maybe it would be convenient to not have to go through the process of setting up those groups but I don’t think it warrants the time and investment to create such an integration when there are easier options that serve a broader range of use cases. No offense, just thinking through the roadmap here…

Leave a Reply