Comments on: Real Community?

By: Clark

Clark — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:11:03 +0000

Kia ora, Ken. I always appreciate your contributions (and posts). Glad to hear if it helps!

By: Ken Allan

Ken Allan — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 03:51:49 +0000

Kia ora Clark! This is so pertinent to where I'm at right now. I'm writing a post on community, what makes some communities sustainable and why it is that so-called learning communities are so difficult to maintain for the purpose(s) intended. Thanks for confirming the idea that a network may not necessarily be a community and vice versa. Catchya later From Middle-earth

By: Clark

Clark — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:45:05 +0000

Thanks for the contributions, Jane & Rob. Agree with both, I think that community can arise in a network (and vice-versa). Hopefully, communities toss out those who don’t belong, but don’t preclude it or force it via the environment. Great thoughts!

By: Rob Moser

Rob Moser — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:24:32 +0000

I see a network as a way of connecting things together – people, in the case of social networks. A community is different in that its a social network in which the members have invested a certain amount of emotional attachment, both in other members, and in the idea of the community as a whole. I think Jane’s right that people come to a network to get something, and to a community to share something – the emotional involvement is what motivates you to put effort back into the community. But there is only so much time and effort any given person has to spend on supporting communities, and invariably we all have more questions than answers; there’s nothing wrong with going to a network just looking to find an answer. So for me the answers to your questions are: yes its different, and yes its a good thing.

Should we keep them separate? Personally, sure; I have places I go for the people and the social interaction and places I just use for connection. But should the places themselves be kept separate? I don’t see how it could be done; the same network can be used as a community by some of its members and just a network by others. What I do think is useful is facilitating this dual use. In a large enough network people will clump together into smaller individual communities; pick the most abstract and un-social hardware support forum you can imagine, and you will eventually find the two folks who read it so regularly that its become a medium for social exchange between them. Now obviously theres no need to prevent this, nor to take all the folks just coming round once for technical advice and try to force them into some sort of social interaction. (“I know you just want your video card to work, but first, lets play charades!”) But if you can add optional features that make it easier for those micro-communities to form and possibly evolve into a larger community (local status for questions answered, tracking friends online, notification of friends posts, etc.) then help build the core of community that supports your wider network.

By: Harold Jarche » Communities, networks and etiquette

Harold Jarche » Communities, networks and etiquette — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 12:40:08 +0000

[…] Clark Quinn looks at social media, and asks, “… how often we call them online communities, but the question is: are they really?” I’m not going to go into network theory or definitions in this post but I think that the difference, perceived or otherwise, between networks and communities is of importance to anyone engaging with web social media, especially for professional purposes. Understanding what you define as a community or a network can help develop your personal rules for connecting, linking, friending, following and of course unfollowing. […]

By: Jane Bozarth

Jane Bozarth — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 18:36:23 +0000

Am sure this will get me into trouble, but…I see a community more about sharing, and a network more about taking.

By: Clark

Clark — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 18:16:07 +0000

Mark, I agree that community is something more. I’d argue it’s more than purpose, it’s caring for the individuals because of that common bond, and reaching out to help them personally as well as professionally. It’s mentoring, but more, helping them develop as individuals, not merely as practitioners.

Which means that we shouldn’t try to force networks to be communities, but help individuals realize that they need community as well as networks, and that networks aren’t where it’s to be found. That said, some individuals do more than just use networks, and care about the individuals thy’re in.

That said, I think there are network managers, but I don’t think communities need managing, they need nurturing, and leading, and other community roles.

Your example of FarmAid, I think, shows how a purpose focused on helping people can gestate into a community. And that’s a good thing. Not sure it could happen around a network focused on a product…

Thanks for the feedback!

By: Mark Woodward

Mark Woodward — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 17:29:54 +0000

How timely this is for me. I’ve been an online community manager for many years, and participated in online networks since the mid eighties.

I’ve been contemplating the difference between online community, and social media. These are both buzzwords, but each has a unique meaning to me. Online community indicates a shared purpose, a cohesive bonding agent of some sort. Social media on the other hand is (to me) much more of a ‘network’ in your terms. It can of course be wrangled into a community, but it is not inherent.

In 1984 I created an email “community/network” for Willie Nelson’s FarmAid shows. It began as a network, but over time became much more of a community. In 1999, I created an online community for the employees of Cracker Barrel OCS. This, from it’s inception was built around a common and shared interest, and was very different.

Does anyone work as a “Community Manager” ? Do you see vital differences?

Mark