Maybe it is possible to lurk in offline communities too? Anonymity is one of
the benefits of large scale urbanisation.

Best

Simon


On 03/05/2011 11:25, "list|marianne" <[email protected]> wrote:

> You - and Helen - are absolutely right.
> I think I was trying to tease out the difference between online/offline
> communities in as much as online (such as here) you can be in/follow/listen
> to the community (i.e. subscribed to the list) without showing yourself/be
> known - an unknown neighbour, but neighbour nonetheless [neighbour is
> probably the wrong term] Whereas in offline community you'll at least have
> to be seen - go to the meeting, even if if you sit on the back row,
> observing/listening, but saying nothing.
> 
> Thanks for the links!
> M
> 
>> From: Simon Biggs <[email protected]>
>> Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>> <[email protected]>
>> Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 10:33:50 +0100
>> To: <[email protected]>, NetBehaviour for networked distributed
>> creativity <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Visualising the netbehaviour neighbours - and the
>> neighbourhood
>> 
>> Helen just hit the proverbial nail. We do not speak of gated neighbourhoods
>> but gated communities. It is because a particular neighbourhood is composed
>> of self-selecting neighbours that it becomes a community. There are other
>> examples. Ghettoes sometimes have these qualities - collective identity
>> forged in and through adversity. However, the modern city is composed as
>> less well defined social structures, due to the fragmentation of our culture
>> into many sub-cultures (I'd argue that's a good thing). These sub-cultures
>> are sometimes location-specific but generally are geographically dispersed.
>> Community, in this situation, is not a function of neighbourhood, as Helen
>> observes. Netbehaviour is (arguably) an exemplar of how communities are now
>> forged in a networked world. As Marc and Ruth and other Netbehaviourists are
>> aware, this form of emergent ontology within a social space in part defined
>> by its networked mediality, is generating significant interest - whether it
>> be the discussions we have here or on the Institute of Distributed
>> Creativity list or in specific research projects, for example:
>> 
>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>> or
>> http://side-creative.ncl.ac.uk/communities/symposium11/
>> 
>> Best
>> 
>> Simon
>> 
>> 
>> On 01/05/2011 18:49, "helen varley jamieson" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> but are they really "neighbours" if we've chosen them? there's a real
>>> difference between "community" & "neighbourhood", that has to do with
>>> choice. "loving thy neighbour" is more of a challenge because (like
>>> family) the thing is that you don't have a choice about who they are ...
>>> 
>>> h : )
>>> 
>>> On 1/05/11 6:26 PM, list|marianne wrote:
>>>> And, then of course there's the concept of the "open neighbourhood",
>>>> and the question of how "open" open is, when everyone -- truly
>>>> everyone - is genuinely welcome or free to move in, potentially
>>>> putting the established neighbourhood (aims, agendas, neighbourliness)
>>>> at risk . Perhaps that is the thing about online neighbourhoods -- we
>>>> select, to the extent we can and because we can, who our neighbours
>>>> are. Returning to the fact that "loving thy neighbours" is a lot
>>>> easier to do when you know (or chose) who your neighbours are.
>>>> 
>>>> Love to all.
>>>> M
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *From: *list|marianne <[email protected]>
>>>> *Reply-To: *NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>> *Date: *Sun, 01 May 2011 16:41:09 +0100
>>>> *To: *netbehaviour <[email protected]>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [NetBehaviour] Visualising the netbehaviour neighbours
>>>> - and the neighbourhood
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Helen,
>>>> I specifically wanted to do netbehaviour, as I've been hanging out
>>>> here for a while and I'm interested in what it means to be here. It
>>>> seems to be my kind of hood in many ways, but as Annie, said, I'm not
>>>> really a neighbor, I'm not really in. (Which may be one very
>>>> understandable  reason why no-one but you has responded).
>>>> So, at the moment the call is extended to different [actual and
>>>> potential] neighbours as well. When I come to the point of actually
>>>> visualising "the" neighbourhood, I'll need to make decisions. Will it
>>>> be specifically this one, Or, one made up of those who chose to
>>>> respond? Then, what would that mean? [Editing the neighbourhood!
>>>> Letting it fail.]
>>>> 
>>>>  -- but, it's interesting.
>>>> All best
>>>> m
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> *From: *helen varley jamieson <[email protected]>
>>>> *Reply-To: *[email protected], NetBehaviour for networked
>>>> distributed creativity <[email protected]>
>>>> *Date: *Sun, 01 May 2011 17:12:38 +0200
>>>> *To: *NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>> *Subject: *Re: [NetBehaviour] Visualising the netbehaviour neighbours
>>>> - and the neighbourhood
>>>> 
>>>>    hi marianne,
>>>>  i'm curious about what neighbourhood you are aiming to visualise; in
>>>>  the email you sent to this list, you specified the netbehaviour
>>>>  neighbourhood, but on the web site where you're posting the
>>>>  portraits, you don't mention netbehaviour; it's an open invitation
>>>>  to anyone who wants to be part of the neighbourhood. in that sense,
>>>>  the neighbourhood you're visualising will be a new & different  one
>>>> to the netbehaviour neighbourhood ... the neighbourhood of  wherever
>>>> your invitation has reached? (altho the netbehviour  neighbourhood is
>>>> indeed open to anyone who wants to be a part of  it).
>>>> 
>>>>  neighbourhood is a really interesting concept to explore, since it's
>>>>  changing so much at the moment. we don't choose our neighbours &
>>>>  even if we don't interact with them a lot they can have a huge
>>>>  impact on our lives (& us on them ... ).
>>>> 
>>>>  h : )
>>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Simon Biggs
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.littlepig.org.uk/
>> 
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.elmcip.net/
>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
> 


Simon Biggs
[email protected]
http://www.littlepig.org.uk/

[email protected]
http://www.elmcip.net/
http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/


_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Reply via email to