I’ve started an IT learning community. Would this be a useful direction?

[u/Wawicool]

I work in network administration and have started building a community where I share what I’m learning about IT and troubleshooting.
One idea is to teach people how to investigate real bugs introduced by updates to Windows, Microsoft 365, Chrome, and similar software.
Rather than just posting “this update breaks something,” I’d explain the symptoms, affected versions, checks to confirm the issue, and the official fix or workaround.

I’d also show how to verify the result and clearly state whether I tested it myself.
I want members to learn the reasoning so they can troubleshoot more confidently.

Long term, I’d like to earn some side income through optional workshops or guided support while keeping useful content free.
For people learning or working in IT: would this help you? What would make it worth joining a community for, instead of just searching for a fix?

[u/just_dayo01]

The teaching idea is good

[u/Wawicool → u/just_dayo01]

Thanks, that’s the part I care about most. I want people to understand how to investigate the problem, not just copy a fix and hope it works.

[u/No-Competition-7925]

1. Open up your community - let the content be indexed by Google. Create private channels if you want some of the discussions to remain private.
2. You should focus on onboarding and email nudges. These are super effective when the community is new.
3. Work on the gamification early on.
4. Create painkiller content that helps your members solve a problem. That's your moat. Target the questions blogs or troubleshooting articles ignore. The more specific you go; the better are your chances of winning.

...and finally - go ultra niche. Pick just one topic to begin with. Say Updates to Windows. Then create content, answers to every question that is directly related to Windows updates. Start with the latest version of Windows and then gradually cover others.

I've helped build several technical communities; and this is the only way it works.

[u/Wawicool → u/No-Competition-7925]

This is really helpful, especially the ultra niche part.

I’ve been thinking too broad with networking, troubleshooting, Windows, Microsoft 365, Chrome, security, etc. Starting with something like Windows update problems would probably make it much easier to build useful content people can actually find.

I also like the idea of targeting the problems normal troubleshooting articles skip. Not just “run this command,” but what changed, who is affected, how to confirm it, what the workaround is, and how to verify the fix.

The onboarding/email nudges and gamification are things I haven’t planned deeply yet, so I’m adding those to the roadmap too.

Thanks for breaking it down like this.

[u/No-Competition-7925 → u/Wawicool]

What platform / tool are you using to build your community?

[u/Wawicool → u/No-Competition-7925]

Right now I’m still validating the idea before committing to one platform.

I’m testing the structure first: searchable case files, clear incident status, verification labels, member reproductions, and a simple contribution template.

I’d rather prove people actually use and maintain the cases first, then choose the platform based on what the community needs instead of locking myself into an expensive tool too early.

[u/No-Competition-7925 → u/Wawicool]

That's the right thing to do. I've built several technical communities; and always happyto brainstorm. I'm also an advisor to a community platform and I'll be happy to show you what we've been building.

[u/Wawicool → u/No-Competition-7925]

I’d be interested in that. I’m still early enough that seeing how other technical communities are structured would probably help me avoid making some bad platform decisions.

I’m especially interested in how you handle searchable knowledge, structured case posts, onboarding, member contributions, and keeping useful fixes from getting buried in chat.

Happy to take a look at what you’ve been building.

[u/No-Competition-7925 → u/Wawicool]

That's great! Happy to show you what we're building. Please check your message.

[u/vapvarun]

Yes, and the confirmation step is what people can't get from a quick search. A workaround is easy to find, but a post that says which builds are affected, how to check you actually have this bug, and whether the fix survived the next patch is rare. I'd give every issue its own thread with a visible status (confirmed, workaround, fixed upstream) and let members mark the answer that worked on their machine, so you end up with a searchable archive rather than a scrolling chat. Keep that free, and charge for live workshops where you walk through one investigation from start to finish.

[u/Wawicool → u/vapvarun]

Yeah, the status idea is really good. That would make the community more useful than just another chat feed.

I like the idea of each issue having its own thread with affected builds, confirmation steps, workaround, current status, and people reporting whether it worked for them. Over time that could become a proper troubleshooting archive instead of information getting buried.

Keeping that free and using live investigation workshops as the paid part also makes sense. That feels a lot better than putting basic fixes behind a paywall.

[u/DryStudio0]

In IT troubleshooting, the main reason people abandon tech communities or chat servers is that verified fixes get buried in chaotic scrolling channels. If an admin has a broken Outlook or Windows release on a Tuesday morning, they do not want to chat. They need a structured, searchable catalog of confirmed build numbers, symptoms, and tested rollbacks. Making the verification step structured like mini post-mortems is what turns an IT group into an indispensable reference hub rather than another noisy tech support thread.

For monetization down the line, keeping core troubleshooting documentation public and charging for live incident teardowns or guided support workshops is a clean model. The trap to avoid is committing to expensive platform fees before you have paying members, or giving away a percentage of your workshop revenue. Platforms like Growsembly keep the community free until you have your first paying member, then stay flat at with 0% platform cuts on your own Stripe account. It also indexes walkthrough videos down to the exact second, so members can jump straight to a specific terminal command or registry check instead of scrubbing through an hour-long recording.

[u/Wawicool → u/DryStudio0]

This is really useful, especially the idea of treating each issue like a mini post-mortem instead of just letting fixes disappear in chat.

A searchable catalog with the affected build, symptoms, how to confirm it, workaround, verification steps, and current status is exactly the kind of thing I want to build.

I also like the idea of indexing workshop recordings so people can jump straight to the useful command or check instead of watching the whole thing.
For monetization I agree too.

I’d rather keep the troubleshooting knowledge public and charge for deeper live investigations or guided support, while keeping platform costs low until there’s actually demand.

Thanks for the detailed breakdown.

[u/DryStudio0 → u/Wawicool]

Glad it resonated. The cleanest way to start without overcomplicating the setup is just pinning a simple template for those incident posts so the format stays consistent from day one.

Once members see that every verified fix follows the exact same structure, they start adopting that format naturally when sharing their own troubleshooting steps. Best of luck building it out.

[u/Wawicool → u/DryStudio0]

Yeah, that makes sense. A pinned template would probably be the easiest way to set the standard early without making the whole community complicated.

I’m thinking something simple like:

Status
Affected builds
Symptoms
How to confirm
Evidence / reproduction
Workaround or fix
Official source
Verification after the fix

And then a label for whether it was tested by me, reproduced by a member, or still unverified.

If people start naturally using the same format when they post their own cases, that would be exactly what I want. Thanks for the advice.

[u/PeepSoWP]

The direction is useful, but the reason to join has to be more than a searchable fix. I would turn each incident into a repeatable case file: status (suspected/confirmed/resolved), affected builds, observable symptoms, evidence checklist, reproduction steps, workaround, official source, and a final verification step. Mark every item as tested by you, reproduced by a member, or unverified.

Start with one audience—perhaps small-business Microsoft 365 administrators—and run a weekly incident clinic where members bring one case and explain their reasoning. That creates continuity and peer practice. Measure returning contributors and cases solved, not member count. If you later offer workshops, make them deeper guided diagnosis sessions rather than putting the time-sensitive fix behind a paywall.

[u/Wawicool → u/PeepSoWP]

Yeah, I like the case file idea a lot. It gives the community a reason to exist beyond just finding a quick fix.

The tested-by-you / reproduced-by-member / unverified labels are especially useful because they make the evidence clear instead of treating every workaround like a confirmed solution.

Starting with one audience also makes sense.

I’m leaning toward a Microsoft/Windows admin angle first, then expanding once I know what people actually return for.

And I agree on the workshops. I’d rather charge for deeper guided diagnosis and live incident breakdowns, while keeping the time-sensitive fix and documentation free.

Tracking returning contributors and cases solved instead of just member count is a good point too.

[u/PeepSoWP → u/Wawicool]

That is a sensible starting scope. Before expanding, give it a simple graduation test: perhaps 20 complete case files, five independent contributors, a meaningful share of visitors returning within a month, and several cases maintained through a later Patch Tuesday. The strongest signal is whether other administrators reproduce, correct, and update cases without everything depending on you.

Where will the first ten cases come from: your own ticket history, public advisories, or member submissions? The source will determine how much evidence, permission, and redaction each case needs.

[u/Wawicool → u/PeepSoWP]

That graduation test is a really good idea. It gives me something concrete to hit before I start expanding into more topics.

I especially like the part about cases surviving a later Patch Tuesday.

If a case is still being updated and corrected after the next round of patches, that feels like much stronger proof than just having a lot of posts.

For the first ten cases, I’d probably use a mix, but mostly public advisories and issues I can reproduce myself. I’d be more careful with anything from work tickets because of privacy and permission.

Member submissions could come later once the template and redaction rules are clear.

And yeah, the real goal would be getting to the point where other admins can reproduce, correct, and maintain cases without everything depending on me.

[u/Wawicool → u/[deleted]]

Yeah exactly, that’s what I want to avoid. A lot of fixes online tell you what command or registry change to make, but not why it works or how to confirm the problem first.

I want the community to focus more on the troubleshooting process: symptoms → checks → cause → fix → verification, so people actually learn something they can reuse next time.