it’s easier to hear the everyday concerns of people and see the patterns of life. Personal websites represent a return to human scale.
Personal websites as an expression of [[Technologie kleiner dan ons 20050617122905]]. This is how I described social software 2004-5 too, before the onslaught by F an T from 2006 on, and the slow disappearance of various socsoft facets (interoperability, apis but also niche tools like Plazes, Dopplr etc).
Over the years, I’ve shifted my news consumption away from publications and towards referrals from real people, but it’s not just my sources of news that have shifted: I am trying to give more of my attention to people, not events. To the things that matter in people’s daily lives. I want less of my energy and attention going to “newsworthy” events far removed from my sphere of influence and more to living non-reactively. Instead of gathering information, I’ve changed my selection criteria for which feeds to follow towards connection and sociability.
Tracy Durnell describes her process to more social filtering, focusing attention on people rather than the news cycle. [[Social netwerk als filter 20060930194648]] and [[Aggregate info to community level 20060930063025]]
I should note that blitzscaling is not the only approach we’re seeing right now. The other (and I would argue wiser) approach to managing dense network formation is through invitation-based mechanisms. Heighten the desire, the FOMO, make participating feel special. Actively nurture the network. When done well, this can get people to go deeper in their participation, to form community.
This seems a false dichotomy. There are more than two ways to do this, more than 'blitzscaling' and 'invitation-based' (which I have come to see as manipulative and a clear sign to stay away as it makes you the means not the goal right from the start of a platform, talking about norm setting). Federation is e.g. very different (and not even uniform in how it's different from both those options: from open to all to starting from a pre-existing small social graph offline). This like above seems to disregard, despite saying building tools is not the same as building community somewhere above, the body of knowledge about stewarding communities / network that exists outside of tech. Vgl [[Invisible hand of networks 20180616115141]]
I don’t think we have them, except piecemeal and by chance, or through the grace of socially gifted moderators and community leads who patch bad product design with their own EQ
indeed. Reminds me of Andrew Keen 2009 in Hamburg raging about the lack of community in socmed and then stating, "except Twitter, that's a real community". Disqualifying himself entirely in a single sentence and being laughed at by the audience at Next09. Taking community stewarding aspects as starting point for tools would yield very different results. [[Communitydenken Wenger 20200924110143]]
I’ll be speaking with and writing about people working on some of the tools and communities that I think help point ways forward—and with people who’ve built fruitful, immediately useful theories and practices
Sounds interesting. Add to feeds. Wrt [[Invisible hand of networks 20180616115141]] scaling comes from moving sideways, repetition and replication. And that takes gathering and sharing (through the network) of examples. Vgl [[OurData.eu Open Data Voorbeelden 20090720142847]] but for civic tech, socsoft? What would it look like?
The big promise of federated social tools is neither Mastodon (or Calckey or any of the other things I’ve seen yet) nor the single-server Bluesky beta—it’s new things built in new ways that use protocols like AT and ActivityPub to interact with the big world.
Vgl [[Build protocols not platforms 20190821202019]] I agree. Kissane says use protocols in new ways for new tools, starting from the premise of actually social software.
we’ve seen weirdly little experimentation with social forms at scale
yes, we call it social media these days, and the focus is on media, not social. Yet [[Menselijk en digitaal netwerk zijn gelijksoortig 20200810142551]], meaning we should design such tools starting from human social dynamics.
Where are the networks that deeply in their bones understand hospitality vs. performance, safe-to vs. safe-from, double-edged visibility, thresholds vs. hearths, gifts vs. barter, bystanders vs. safety-builders, even something as foundational as power differentials?
yes!
Even most of the emergent gestures in our interfaces are tweaks on tech-first features—@ symbols push Twitter to implement threading, hyperlinks eventually get automated into retweets, quote-tweets go on TikTok and become duets. “Swipe left to discard a person” is one of a handful of new gestures, and it’s ten years old.
Author discusses specific socially oriented interface functions (left/right swiping, @-mentions) that are few and old. There's also the personal notes on new connections in Xing and LinkedIn (later), imo. And the groupings/circles in various platforms. Wrt social, adding qualitative descriptions to a connection to be able to do pattern detection e.g. would be interesting, as is moving beyond just hub with spokes (me and my connections) and allowing me to add connections I see between people I'm connected to. All non-public though, making it unlikely for socmed. Vgl [[Personal CRM as a Not-LinkedIn – Interdependent Thoughts 20210214170304]]
https://web.archive.org/web/20230612090744/https://erinkissane.com/all-this-unmobilized-love
Reminds me of https://www.zylstra.org/blog/2006/09/barcamp_brussel/ #2006/09/24 and the session I did with [[Boris Mann]] on 'all the things I need from social media, they don't provide yet' phrasing [[People Centered Navigation 20060930163901]]. http://barcamp.org/w/page/400567/BarCampBrussels