You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
When large social-media platforms allow users to easily form and self-organize into interest groups, highly related communities can arise. For example, the Reddit site hosts not just a group called food, but also HealthyFood, foodhacks, foodporn, and cooking, among others. Are these highly related communities created for similar classes of reasons (e.g., to focus on a subtopic, to create a place for allegedly more "high-minded" discourse, etc.)? How do users allocate attention between such close alternatives when they are available or emerge over time? Are there different types of relations between close alternatives such as sharing many users vs. a new community drawing away members of an older one vs. a splinter group failing to cohere into a viable separate community? We investigate the interactions between highly related communities using data from reddit.com consisting of 975M posts and comments spanning an 8-year period. We identify a set of typical affixes that users adopt to create highly related communities and build a taxonomy of affixes. One interesting finding regarding users' behavior is: after a newer community is created, for several types of highly-related community pairs, users that engage in a newer community tend to be more active in their original community than users that do not explore, even when controlling for previous level of engagement.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: Online communities are among the most popular destinations on the Internet, but not all online communities are equally successful. For every flourishing Facebook, there is a moribund Friendster--not to mention the scores of smaller social networking sites that never attracted enough members to be viable. This book offers lessons from theory and empirical research in the social sciences that can help improve the design of online communities. The social sciences can tell us much about how to make online communities thrive, offering theories of individual motivation and human behavior that, properly interpreted, can inform particular design choices for online communities. The authors draw on the literature in psychology, economics, and other social sciences, as well as their own research, translating general findings into useful design claims. They explain, for example, how to encourage information contributions based on the theory of public goods, and how to build members' commitment based on theories of interpersonal bond formation. For each design claim, they offer supporting evidence from theory, experiments, or observational studies.The book focuses on five high-level design challenges: starting a new community, attracting new members, encouraging commitment, encouraging contribution, and regulating misbehavior and conflict. By organizing their presentation around these fundamental design features, the authors encourage practitioners to consider alternatives rather than simply adapting a feature seen on other sites.

[2]: Usenet is a complex socio-technical phenomenon, containing vast quantities of information. The sheer scope and complexity make it a challenge to understand the many dimensions across which people and communication are interlinked. In this work, we present visualizations of several aspects and scales of Usenet that combine to highlight the range of variation found in newsgroups. We examine variations within hierarchies, newsgroups, authors, and social networks. We find a remarkable diversity, with clear variations that mark starting points for mapping the broad sweep of behavior found in this and other social cyberspaces. Our findings provide the basis for initial recommendations for those cultivating, managing, contributing, or consuming collectively constructed conversational content.

[3]: Using the information systems lifecycle as a unifying framework, we review online communities research and propose a sequence for incorporating success conditions during initiation and development to increase their chances of becoming a successful community, one in which members participate actively and develop lasting relationships. Online communities evolve following distinctive lifecycle stages and recommendations for success are more or less relevant depending on the developmental stage of the online community. In addition, the goal of the online community under study determines the components to include in the development of a successful online community. Online community builders and researchers will benefit from this review of the conditions that help online communities succeed.
A number of studies have examined multi-community platforms in different contexts. Subcommunity survival [2] [3] [1] is sometimes framed in the context of a meta-community. Also, find that different newsgroups exhibit different conversation patterns, though tehy don't examine if the same users behave differently across platforms (as in vasilescu2013stackoverflow ). Finally, adamic2008knowledge examine the quality of user answers across different categories of Yahoo Answers.