[NetBehaviour] Communication in Online Communities
bram.org at gmail.com
Wed Oct 7 11:05:56 CEST 2015
Of course we should keep the list.
But you can't talk about all things in depth here. Sometimes I get very
interesting reactions via facebook, maybe because I am connected there to
more people interested in a certain subject than on netbehaviour, maybe
because I can easier involve them personnally?
You can discuss on facebook : Proof :
I don't really know what this means for this discussion, but we should stay
in reality and not fool ourselves.
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Pall Thayer <pallthay at gmail.com> wrote:
I haven't been following all of this discussion but some of it. John
> Hopkins' comment made me want to reply.
> It's hard to tell a well-functioning and successful mailing list that
> mailing lists aren't "the thing" anymore. But they aren't. Don't get me
> wrong, I love Netbehaviour and do so for all of the reasons that it
> shouldn't work in the modern net-world. The internet has evolved into this
> fleeting-moment thing. Anything that isn't picked up within 30 minutes is
> old and abandoned. Obviously, this is not at all conducive to lengthy and
> detailed examination or contemplation. It reduces everything to quick,
> witty comments that lend little or no meat to the actual issue.
> Please, please, please do not change Netbehaviour.
> Look at what happened to Rhizome. They made subtle changes to their
> platform that caused everyone to abandon it. They tried to claim that it
> was facebook rather than their changes that killed the mailing lists but it
> was their decision to stop nurturing Rhizome as a community and become an
> online "journal" (or whatever you might call it) instead.
> Personally, I don't care about facebook and other platforms harvesting my
> information and even benefiting from it. It's like Douglas Rushkoff
> implied, if you're not a paying customer, you're the product being sold.
> Either you use the service and accept that or you don't use the service at
> all. You can't use the service AND complain about the service's methods of
> financing your use of it. Regardless of any notions of what platforms like
> facebook and twitter may have been created for, it's very obvious that
> they're not used for meaningful debate or discussion. Try initiating a
> meaningful discussion on facebook... I guarantee that it will quickly
> dissolve into anecdotes, funny (or not) gifs and other comments that lend
> nothing to the original post. That's just what you do on facebook and what
> a lot of people appear to want from their online interactions.
> Having access to a mailing list that actually promotes and fosters
> in-depth discussion of emergent subjects is invaluable and it is why we're
> all here. I know that a lot of you are on facebook, we're "friends". But
> Netbehaviour is where we come for the "real" stuff.
> Best r.
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 9:46 PM John Hopkins <chazhop at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 06/Oct/15 05:18, Joumana Mourad wrote:
>> > Can anyone share why FB, G+, or any of the discussion platforms did not
>> > work?
>> For me, I don't know about other folks, but I refuse to use those other
>> platforms that harvest my information. I used to be an early adopter with
>> different technologies as I was teaching about techno-social engagement,
>> but I
>> bailed completely on FB in 2010 after being on it for a few years,
>> So it's email or bulletin boards or posting on my own web space, if that
>> doesnt 'work' oh well. ... Obviously the NSA has access to everything
>> that I can
>> implement, but at least I can limit the access that commercial interests
>> have to
>> my data... And, being outside the FB bubble, one pays a price (like my
>> 'connection' with my family is quite limited because few of them will send
>> emails ever. So, there is always a price to be paid when one does not
>> participate in the dominant social protocols...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NetBehaviour