Helen, > getting back to the networked context, what this adds is > the ability to initiate such projects where circumstances > make it difficult or impossible to bring people physically > together.
I agree. Also, a digital network can provide tools for tracking and visualizing relational dynamics within the community, such as folksonomies, maps and channels that support different modes of communication. However, you seem to imply that physical presence is the most important condition for a community, and that a digital network would only be something like a prosthesis to "alleviate distance". Is this correct? > > h : ) > > On 7/07/10 11:01 AM, Eugenio Tisselli wrote: > > Hi Helen, > > > > I fully agree with you that commonality is a necessary > condition for the emergence of a community... which, in > turn, will constantly transform the very nature of that > commonality through interaction between its members. I also > believe that commonality can be subtle, or even > contradictory: a community may form even emerge out of > people holding antagonistic positions. Let me illustrate: > > > > Last year, megafone.net was invited to do a project in > Manizales, Colombia, involving two groups: displaced people > (people who had to abandon their home towns because of > violence) and de-mobilized people (ex-guerrilleros). > Obvously, these two groups are in extreme positions, which > can be understood as the opposite ends of the Colombian > conflict. However, they were all willing to work on the > project. Antoni Abad, the head of megafone.net, went there > and started the project by working separately with both > groups. Each group would share a common mobile phone, from > which the participants could send tagged images and audio > clips to a web page. The goal for each group was to create > and share a "community memory", in which they would reflect > their daily life. Each week, the phone would change hands > and would be passed on to another participant. > > > > Surprisingly, after a few days of activity, the > participants themselves asked Antoni if he could arrange a > meeting of both groups. And then it happened: displaced and > demobilized people were shaking hands and even hugging each > other after realizing that they had so many things in > common. According to our Colombian hosts, something like > this had never happened before. > > > > The web-based community memory they created together > is available at megafone.net: > > http://www.megafone.net/TEMPORAL > > > > If I have to see this project in retrospective, I must > say that the web page both groups created using mobile > phones unexpectedly worked as a pretext for their > face-to-face meeting. I also have to say that this > community's creative production of itself is reflected in > the folksonomy which emerged from their participation in the > project, which can be viewed here: > > http://www.megafone.net/TEMPORAL/tags.php > > > > The most relevant tags speak for themselves. > > > > Finally, I must admit that my intention to start from > a taxonomy of networks was maybe a little too far-fetched. I > agree that networks are a good example of a fluid space, > which can hardly be made to fit into a set of fixed > categories. But I just wanted to try and see if we could > characterize and find different types of networks, and see > if we could identify which of their traits favor (or > inhibit) collective creativity. > > > > > > > > Eugenio Tisselli Vélez > > cub...@yahoo.com > > http://www.motorhueso.net > > > > > > -- > ____________________________________________________________ > > helen varley jamieson: creative catalyst > he...@creative-catalyst.com > http://www.creative-catalyst.com > http://www.avatarbodycollision.org > http://www.upstage.org.nz > ____________________________________________________________ > _______________________________________________ > empyre forum > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au > http://www.subtle.net/empyre _______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
