Curation: roundups and reading lists members value

Your members are surrounded by information. Articles, videos, podcasts, tools and forum threads about your subject appear constantly, and most of it is noise. Members do not have time to sift through it, and they often cannot tell the good from the merely popular. That is a problem you can solve without creating everything yourself.

Curation means selecting the best of other people's work and explaining why it matters. Done well, a monthly roundup or a carefully chosen reading list can be one of the most valued things in your membership, because it saves members hours and brings your judgment to bear on the whole field, not just your own content. Done badly, it is a list of links anyone could have found. The difference is almost entirely in the commentary.

Why curation is worth your time

• It saves members time. You read fifty things so they can read the five that matter.
• It shows your expertise. Choosing well and explaining why demonstrates judgment in a way that creating alone does not.
• It keeps content flowing. A roundup takes less time to produce than an original lesson, which helps on busy weeks.
• It widens members' view. Members hear other perspectives, which makes your membership feel less like one person's opinion.

It is not a replacement for original teaching. Think of it as a regular side dish that makes the main course more valuable.

Two formats: roundups and reading lists

Roundups are regular, often weekly or monthly, and cover what is new and noteworthy: useful articles, new tools, interesting discussions and developments in your field. They are timely by nature.

Reading lists are lasting collections on a single topic or for a particular kind of member: “Ten essential reads on game balance” or “Where to start if you have never shipped a game.” They are evergreen and belong in your library.

Many memberships use both. Items that prove their worth in a roundup can graduate to a reading list later.

Choosing what makes the cut

Your selection criteria are your value. Decide in advance what you are looking for, and be strict. Useful questions for each candidate:

1. Would a member actually act differently after reading this?
2. Is it accurate, and does the author know what they are talking about?
3. Does it add something your own content does not already cover?
4. Is it the best piece on this point, or just the most recent?
5. Is it accessible to members, without a paywall they cannot get past?

A roundup with five excellent items is better than one with fifteen average ones. If it was a slow month, say so and keep the list short.

The commentary is the product

A bare link list gives members homework. Commentary gives them a reason to click, or permission not to. For each item, add a few sentences covering what it is, why it matters and who it is for. Your honest opinion, including where you disagree, is especially valuable.

Consider a hypothetical membership for independent game developers, run by Soren. Here is a weak roundup entry and a strong one:

Weak: Great article on playtesting. Worth a read!

Strong: A practical guide to running your first playtest. A solo developer walks through how she recruited ten strangers, what she asked them and the three changes that came out of it. Best for: anyone who has only had friends test their game. My take: her question list is excellent, but I would skip her advice to watch testers over their shoulder; many people play differently when watched. The recording approach in our testing lesson works better. Reading time: about ten minutes.

The strong entry tells members exactly what they will get, whether it is for them and how it connects to your own teaching.

A simple roundup structure

A consistent structure makes roundups quick to write and easy to read:

• A short opening: one or two sentences on the theme or standout item this time.
• The pick of the month: the single item you most want members to see, with the fullest commentary.
• Three to six other items, grouped by type or topic, each with a few lines of commentary.
• From our library: one of your own pieces that relates to the items above.
• A question to discuss in the community.

Keep a running file where you drop candidates as you come across them, so the roundup is mostly assembly by the time you sit down to write.

Respect the creators you curate

Curation relies on other people's work, so treat it fairly:

• Link to the original rather than copying it into your membership.
• Credit the author and publication by name.
• Quote only a short passage when you need to, and make clear it is a quote.
• Never paste whole articles or reproduce paid material for members.

What counts as fair use of someone else's work varies by country and situation; copyright basics for membership content gives an overview, and it is worth checking your approach with a qualified professional if you plan to quote heavily.

Build reading lists for each level

Reading lists work especially well when tailored to where members are. A beginner's list might focus on foundational pieces with plenty of explanation; an advanced list might include technical papers and opinionated essays. If your membership serves several levels, the labeling approach in serving beginners and experts in the same membership applies to lists too. Review each list once or twice a year, replacing broken links and anything that has been overtaken by something better.

Your first steps

1. Start a running file for candidate items and add to it whenever you find something good.
2. Write down your selection criteria so you can apply them consistently.
3. Publish your first roundup with no more than six items and real commentary on each.
4. Choose one core topic and build a reading list of five to ten lasting pieces.
5. Link your own related content from every roundup and list.
6. Ask members which picks they found most useful, and adjust your criteria.

Anyone can share links. What members value is your judgment about which ones matter and why.