>Which brings to mind another thought. The Net (people + network of
>computers) is undergoing a transformation, or probably has already. It is
>no longer a static "space", but a dynamic entity, an "organism" of sorts,
>that is capable of quickly responding to situations and crises
>(notwithstanding IBM's and MSNBC's failure to keep Oyimpic and TWA
>information up-to-date on their sites). I believe it is time to change the
>language (metaphors and models) we use to discuss the Internet to reflect
>that change. Keeping the "Internet as space" metaphor is detrimental to
>Internet's progress toward becoming an active, dynamic entity.
>
First, let me say, Kris, terribly sorry about losing your friend. It's an
awful thing, losing someone like that...such a shock.
Second, when I talked about a "space of community," I didn't mean to say a
"static 'space'" in any sense. I actually didn't mean "Internet as space,"
either. I meant community as space, facilitated (made possible) on the
Internet.
So, community: a "space" with "room for" (allowing for) certain kinds of
relationships and interactions, and not allowing others. There are places
on the Net where people meet, fall in love, and get married. There are
places where people share info about coding in Java. There probably isn't
much overlap. (Hmmm...the "Java Love Site?" I dunno...)
Now, staticness:
First, one can create spaces of community more easily on the Net that ever
before. Before, you'd have had to get a physical space, get all the people
you wanted in the same place at the same time, and get them to stay (or come
back regularly) until "community happened." Now you set up a site or an
email list, and promote it, and it happens. Not neccesarily easily, but
more easily than before.
So, one can create new "space of community."
Second, such spaces are--or could be--fairly plastic. I'm sure if you look
at the history of the FC list, there have been moments of
interaction/relationship that completely altered what could be said or
established next. The raucous, often disagreeable, yet friendly atmosphere
has probably not always been here. I'd be willing to bet it took over a
year to emerge.
In fact that's where the "space of community" distinction becomes
useful--how can we interact so as to broaden or alter the space of
community? With an awareness of this idea, one can actually speak and
listen intentionally in such a way that we alter it in a direction we want.
Increased intimacy, more fun, more combativeness, whatever.
Also, entity:
Entity metaphor vs. space metaphor...hmmm....
Entity: self-awareness, possibly self-protection, overtones of hip
metabiology. Entities can be static, too (self-perpetuating). Note the
frequent occurrence of "self."
Entities also have character, "personality." So do communities.
Space: allowing, creating, unfolding...united, divided (spaces within
spaces--segregation!)...I think this is a richer metaphor, though I'm not sure.
We could say something like a "wave/particle" metaphor...the "space/entity"
metaphor...or not. What do you guys think?
--John Stoner
--Internet Explorations
--jstoner@interaccess.com
--http://www.interaccess.com/explore/
--personal page: http://www.interaccess.com/explore/stoner