Baustellenschild

Diese Seiten befinden sich im Aufbau.

Sie können unvollständige, veraltete und/oder sich widersprechende Informationen enthalten.

Towards a Sustainable Online Community

Aus Erlebnisraum Nachhaltige Entwicklung
Zur Navigation springen Zur Suche springen

On this page you will find the first results of our investigations about sustainable online communities.

Wait for it. ;)


Goal: To build a sustainable online community.

What is a Sustainable Online Community?

  • Comprises a diverse audience concerning gender, age, location, interests, etc.
  • Sustains for a significantly longer time than what could be expected when it was created.
  • Has substantially less personal conflicts (“flame wars”) than in other online communities with comparable diversity.
  • Not driven by the consumption of external input, but it is productive by itself in some field/s of art and/or science.

Steps to Establish a Sustainable Community

  • Create the software tools
  • Social Media Group willing to introduce new students to the sustainable platforms
  • Attract user interest
  • Ongoing public art and/or projects
  • Decentralized approach, no single creator
  • Maintain the international online community
Continue to welcome newcomers, ease the transition into the fold
  • Raise awareness of sustainability in the community
  • Community feeds itself with art and science
  • Focus on a topic of sustainability for these projects
  • Appropriate forms of expression for furthering awareness of sustainability

Sustainable Tools for a Sustainable Community

Free Software (Open Source Software)
  • Not reliant on a single company
  • Available to all users
  • Freedom to study, modify, redistribute the software
  • Example: phpBB
Benefits
  • User-controlled content and information feel more secure/comfortable
  • Prevents the one-way data relationship many companies have with their userbase
  • Company receives data on users, users not privy to company actions
  • Information stored there by users liable to be lost with site closure (not sustainable)


Potential Software Tools

Platforms that house, inspire, and connect the community.

Email List (with public archive)

  • Good for readable resource rather than in-the-moment community
  • Ability to scan and skim content
  • Potential Challenge: Sorting everything and keeping the overview is up to the user
  • Easy for email to be lost in the shuffle

Wiki

  • Managed by the users themselves
  • Sustainable: multiple user-editors means multiple avenues for content addition
  • Logically centralized: all users working together on a single resource in one location
  • Good for lists
  • Project priorities, needs
  • Display pertinent information immediately (vs. a forum thread)
  • Useful to display the current state of subjects
  • Potential challenge: Not the best tool for general community discussion
  • Possible scattered conversations in a variety of locations
  • Difficult for any one user to locate it all
  • May be avoided with clearly designated comment sections
  • One intermediate solution could be to redirect discussions from the wiki to a forum
  • for instance by placing an URL to the thread on each “discussion” page
  • Best if not enforced
  • Fruitful discussion can die immediately if it is forced from one platform to another
  • Long-term solution could be a wiki whose “discussion page” (or “talk page” in Wikipedia) is a thread in a forum, automagically.

Discussion Forum

  • Easily bring new users into the ongoing conversation
  • Challenge: Less skimmable, harder to find information
  • May be mitigated with outside resources that direct the user to the appropriate locations
  • Still blitzable
  • Posts added chronologically
  • Easier to follow conversation
  • More difficult to sort by subject
  • Mitigated by good organization of subforums
  • Provide ordering and searching tools which can help to keep overview
  • Potential markup languages
  • phpBB
  • Fairly widely used
  • Markdown
  • Possibly difficult to jump into
  • Some similarities to MediaWiki's markup
  • User-entered HTML
  • More freedom
  • Easily mangled

Additional tools

  • Something like Dropbox, file-sharing source
  • Having a file-sharing service in the same Internet domain as a phpBB forum would simplify the use of images in the forum

Conclusions

  • Some combination of the above is most likely
  • The best long-term solution will be gateways connecting these worlds
  • All types of users may participate using their favorite tools
  • The best short-term solution is to use something like phpBB
  • In the short term, as long as gateways are absent, too many competing platforms could potentially confuse users
  • Once platforms no longer compete, too many choices might still lead to confusion


Analysis of Existing Internet Communities

Why is the OTT sustainable?

Traditions that keep the community together
  • As opposed to traditions that tend to alienate newcomers
Friendly population
  • High levels of creativity, intelligence
  • The thread didn't spring from this particular userbase; the individual users were attracted to the community
  • As evidenced by OTTer activity in the rest of the forums
Use of a Wiki
  • Interconnectivity: Signatures in-thread link to the wiki
  • Well-written
  • Kept up to date
  • Used to further understand the thread
  • Centered around community rather than artwork
"Blitzing" or "Reading it all"
  • Newcomers encouraged to start at beginning, read entire content
  • Experience formation of community personally
  • Means of accessing community history
  • While reading, help and motivation offered from the community
  • Tools for consumption of the thread (Example: mrobdex)
  • Artistic reward while blitzing: the frames of the comic
Willingness to assimilate new ideas
  • Extends to user presentation (avatars), communication formatting (footnotes), manner of "speaking" (slang)
  • Perhaps result of competing tensions: desire to follow OTC and onset of The Madness
  • Created core set of users not dissuaded by unexpected changes
  • Easier to welcome new traditions
  • Flexible community
  • Flexibility fosters sustainability
  • Common knowledge that all users have opportunity to contribute their own traditions
  • More apt to participate in others' traditions due to this knowledge

Why is Drawception problematic in terms of sustainability?

  • Very young (in age) community based around a game
  • Arguments over procedurals (gameplay)
  • Reminiscent of heated OTT discussions over "how to blitz"
  • Game site attempting to also be a social media site
  • Tension between game and social aspects
  • Results in a split userbase
  • Opposing "sides" with differing goals
  • Community fights self rather than fostering self
  • Social tools inadequate
  • Lack of private messaging system: users have to seek secondary communities like Facebook to connect
  • Unmoderated forums
  • Hundreds of tiny, scattered comment sections that are difficult to find
  • Near impossible to read it all
  • Little sense of community heritage
  • Population focused on current games and daily trends
  • Potential fixes
  • Remove the dichotomy?
  • Provide a Game Interface in the platform

Conclusions

  • Be willing to experiment, hear new ideas, adapt to the unfamiliar
  • Don't fear chasing away the community by exposing them to new challenges
  • Perhaps necessary for distilling out the core set of users who will become the solid rock to build the sustainable community on
  • There must also be something to bring back those who flee the Madness
  • Promote individual creativity and recognize user contributions
  • Optional traditions rather than mandatory
  • A sustainable online platform must provide tools to ease blitzing everything
  • Search functions
  • Filters
  • Blitzer scripts, as in the OTT
  • Hyper-Threading
  • Insert searchable headlines into communications like email
  • Create an archive to handle them, display them online, and maintain them while sending new emails through a web interface


Miscellaneous

What about "Decentralization"?

  • Set up a “decentralized” alternative to Facebook such as Diaspora and/or Friendica
  • “Decentralized” means, in this context, that the infrastructure isn't controlled by a single company
  • All users can contribute to the infrastructure by setting up their own servers
  • Criticism: this “decentralized” approach would make it more difficult to access these platforms
  • However, it is more complicated to contribute to the infrastructure of a decentralized platform than to access Facebook
  • Yet just as easy to access the platform
  • Having all resources physically distributed among several servers doesn't conflict with having them logically centralized
  • The user experiences them as a single resource
  • Summary: Need for a logically centralized platform
  • Physically decentralized
  • Goals do not conflict

Potential Names

  • Sustainable Online Platform
  • Eierlegende Wollmilchsau
  • Very useful, but also very ambitious

More Challenges

  • Students may be spread among too many disparate social media platforms with no clear recommendation
  • Results in factions that have few intercommunity exchanges
  • Differences in language