[theforum] A sound of silence
Martin Burns
martin at easyweb.co.uk
Sat Nov 22 06:00:51 CST 2008
Matt
I don't think your perspective is invalid, but in a couple of ways, it
bears out your own individual experience, which I'm not convinced is
universal (and the fact that Adrian disagreed kinda backs that up for
me):
On 21 Nov 2008, at 16:03, Matt Warden wrote:
>> It seems to me (as more of an outsider) that the 'community' you lost
>> is actually just a group of friends, smart, intelligent, witty people
>> that were part of thelist and part of the evolt.org admin and that
>> have mostly moved on
>
> I guess I can only suggest you go back and read some of the archives
> from a long time ago.
Actually, that *is* how it felt to me, although the group of friend
was *very* good at being welcoming and inclusive - "hey, come on in"
I joined because I was asked to - I'd seen the initiative as a result
of the MJ thing, and certainly thought "Hey, that's interesting" but
it was through being individually invited that I took the step.
But again, this will be different for other people; there are a whole
*load* of mechanisms by which people came in.
>>> People join a community because they wish to feel a part of
>>> something
>>> positive and bigger than themselves.
>> No. That's why they get involved in admin/content of evolt.org, and
>> that's a subsection of the community, not the entire community.
>> That's
>> not why people read articles or subscribe to thelist.
>
> Articles and mailing list posts do not make a community.
Until thechat happened, that's *all there was*. It was very work-
focused, certainly on the public lists, and through the insistence on
staying on-topic, and paying back off-topicness with <tip>s, it didn't
have much chance to be more than that.
Of course, the *admin* list was a whole *other* story - that very much
was a small community of people who became friends. And the point of
launching thechat (as described by Mr Handelaar when he came up with
the idea) was to bring that to a much wider group of people.
It's still not going to be everyone, and it's perfectly OK to have
varying levels of involvement, from 'visits the site once in a blue
moon' to 'hard-core member'. Thinking that everyone should have to
feel at the centre of the community is just a wrong expectation.
To give you an example:
There's a pub in Edinburgh, Sandy Bell's, where there's live
traditional Scottish music. Now I used to be a regular when I lived
within walking distance. I often played in music sessions there,
joining other people who hosted the sessions. I never hosted a
session; I never worked behind the bar. But I felt part of the
community. I still do, even though I've not been there in some years.
So when listen to the radio today and hear giants of the Traditional
Scottish Music[1] scene talk about playing there and picking up
friends that they now play and record professionally with, I still
recognise myself as part of that community.
[1] we're talking the equivalents of Jagger, Bowie, Bono and Thom
Yorke here.
> If you were hear
> when publishing an article on evolt was actually an impressive thing
> rather than a response to solicitation, then perhaps you would not
> have reacted to my post like you have.
Interestingly, in those days, we published pretty much everything,
including what would now be simple links on spool.evolt.org; we're a
lot more choosy these days in wanting substantive articles.
>> We happen to be in an era of web dev where frankly, not
>> much really new and exciting is happening.
>
> If that were true, I would have left the industry a long time ago.
Aye, but the area of interest now is in the more complex areas where
our (relatively junior) audience tends not to be involved. In the days
of browser wars, simply getting a page to render consistently cross-
browser was an achievement.
> thelist did once have a very specific
> niche and you simply could not find an equivalent.
> It offered very specific value. It does not anymore.
Yes - simple HTML, Perl & ASP mostly. Much (not all!) of which is now
not a live set of problems. And the more complex areas have grown
their own specific communities, which is not necessarily A Bad Thing,
but as we didn't follow, I don't think we should be beating ourselves
up over thelist's content as much as over the community's focus.
>> What's in it for them? Why on earth would db
>> guru's be interested in answering noobie questions on thelist,
>> repeatedly.
>
> Again, I don't know how to respond to this. Even today rudy fielded a
> "newbie" database question.
> Your question of "What's in it for them" is precisely what you and
> everyone else here needs to understand in order to build community.
Yep - another thing that communities offer people: the opportunity to
feel good about themselves by giving back. Which is fine, but people
who are happy to be giving nearly all the time but not receiving, are
rare.
> He is not subscribed to thelist, but he
> occasionally checks the archive for SQL and database questions.
Which I did for a long time re CMS.
> Building community is about people, not technology. The
> "roll your own" CMS idea was not about a technology need; it was about
> people and common purpose and the community that is created around
> such a project. You may disagree with the individual idea,
Well yes, as previously mentioned: working on the CMS had a huge
impact on the people who did so. But that number was, is, and always
will be, tiny. And it's really easy to leap from "worked for me" to
"will work for many people".
> but that
> isn't the point. The point is that prior to the last couple of days,
> the entire focus has been on HTML and server configuration and whether
> fonts should be this or that. These are all good discussions and need
> to happen, but they have nothing to do with community.
Actually, that stuff - working on common goals whatever they are - is
arguing your point pretty much exactly. But it necessarily involves a
small subsection of the wider community, whether it's custom coding a
CMS, or building HTML and Server Config, or just talking about design.
It's meta-work, and *all* communities face it. *All* communities face
the 'get involved' problem, whereby activists are trying to make
everyone else into clones of themselves who work on the community
itself - join the committee/come on a march/sell the newspaper/build
the CMS. But activists are by definition different, and nearly always
find it difficult to see why non-activists don't really have enough
time/interest for meta-work, and that that's not necessarily a failing
or lack of interest in the community itself.
Level of 'Getting involved' is a really bad way to measure the success/
vitality of a community, and offering more opportunities to do so only
has limited use in increasing the success/vitality.
Cheers
Matin
--
> Spammers: Send me email -> yumyum at easyweb.co.uk to train my filter
> http://dspam.nuclearelephant.com/
More information about the theforum
mailing list