I really like the way you frame this. Please do share anything you find on this!
You might find interesting (if you haven't seen it already) Chris Kelty's term *recursive public*, which he uses to describe geekdom (with an emphasis on open source software communities) as a whole. http://p2pfoundation.net/Recursive_Public "A recursive public is a public that is vitally concerned with the material and practical maintenance and modification of the technical, legal, practical, and conceptual means of its own existence as a public; it is a collective independent of other forms of constituted power and is capable of speaking to existing forms of power through the production of actually existing alternatives." If you'll forgive the self-promotion, you might find this work on Weird Twitter (an on-line community not unlike what you describe) and symbolic bounded network communities of interest. http://ethnographymatters.net/2013/06/30/why-weird-twitter-part-1/ On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:45 PM, Michael Allan <[email protected]> wrote: > Folks, > > Below I define what I call "self-determined publics". Has anything > similar been attempted before? > > A self-determined public is an open, topical community that > proclaims the definitive bounds of its own communications. The > proclamation takes the form of a timely sequence of references > (e.g. web links) each pointing to a communication of the public, > such that all references together define the total of that public's > communications in time and space. For example: > > Ago Place Title (click to visit thread) > ------- --------- ------------------------------------------ > 17 min r/Foo How do we attach the doohickey? > 5 hr Foo-L The problem with so and so's proposal. > 1 day FuBarz Who are these Foos, anyway? > 1 day r/Foo This, that, and the next thing. > 2 days FooStack What's the best thingamy for such and such? > . . . and so on > > The boundary proclamation is similar in form to a conventional news > feed. It concerns a specific topic or category. Differences are > in a) the exclusion of mass communications, b) the claim to > totality, and c) the self-determination that redeems that claim. > (a) A principle criterion for inclusion is that one may immediately > join any of the referenced communications as a peer. One-way, mass > communications are excluded. > > (b) The boundary proclamation claims to cover the entire public > discussion of the topic across all communication media and sites. > It claims to be the most complete, accurate and timely overview of > the extended discussion that is available anywhere. > > (c) This claim is redeemed by the public members themselves who > submit the references, self-organize the necessary labour, and > self-constitute the necessary government. No aspect of this > redeeming self-determination is controlled by an external > authority. > > > I'm looking for brief pointers, please. I don't know of any actual > implementations of this, or projects that are working on it. I'll > share what's found. > > -- > Michael Allan > > Toronto, +1 416-699-9528 > http://zelea.com/ > -- > Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by > emailing moderator at [email protected] or changing your settings at > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >
-- Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at [email protected] or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
