Monday, October 1, 2007

6.1: Stay On Topic

The Leviathan refers to the enforcement mechanisms that bound our collective behaviors to create social norms. Many of these social norms are closely guarded by powerful social institutions, such as the law, policies, and political rights of citizenship; but, most others are less obvious, existing mostly as social "expectations" - not necessarily requirements. Examples would include a collective tradition or ritual, common language and conversational formats, and group specific etiquette or ethics.

One example of a social norm are the posting procedures that are included in almost every formal or semi-formal Listserv application. A Listserv is an asynchronous mailing list program that allows a user to communicate a message to other users who have subscribed to the same list. Most Listservs operate under a set of posting guidelines, that are usually outlined during the user subscription process via an initial welcome message, a user policy confirmation page, or a FAQ page available on the originating site. Common guidelines include: respecting other posters, a word count minimum/maximum, guidelines regarding foul language, the acceptability of solicitation, rules against double posting, spam control, and the acceptable subjects for posting. In instances where the Listserv guidelines are not immediately available, a user can request information via a number of commands that elicit an automated response from the Listserv program, email others users requesting help, or simply wait for a message from the administrator notifying them of their misuse of the service.

The Leviathan effect comes into play when a user misuses the service, especially on a formal Listserv, where the messages are expected to conform to a certain protocol in both composition and content. A user's first breach of protocol usually warrants a warning; further abuses result in suspension or a cancellation of the user's subscription. The Leviathan is especially harsh in Listserv's since messages sent to the list are irreversible. There is no way to delete a message - once it's sent, it's in every subscriber's mailbox. An instance of the Leviathan recently occurred at my job. I work for a nonprofit organization that runs a county wide Listserv application. In the interests of the greater nonprofit community, we closely monitor the Listserv to make sure that posts relate to subjects that are relevant to the mission and purpose of the service. A few weeks ago, a new user began posting personal appeals to the Listserv, asking for donations and aid for a family member with a terminal illness. Although it was a very touching message and certainly deserving of attention, we were obligated to chastise the user for misuse of the Listserv - it did not relate to the subject matter set forth by the Listserv's guidelines and to deviate from those guidelines would only encourage similar activity from other posters who know someone with a terminal illness. A norm of the Listserv was violated and the Leviathan (in this case, the administrators of the Listserv, operating under the guidelines of the service) acted to preserve the integrity of the social agreement.

Wallace would call the guidelines of the Listserv, which are concrete definitions of the social norms, examples of "signs on the wall" - indicators of acceptable behavior within a certain online space and the blueprint for conformity within that space. When these rules are violated, as in the case of the user posting on a subject inappropriate to the Listserv's purpose (Wallace calls this a "violation of network wide conventions", then they are met with what Wallace calls "the Arched Brow," wherein members of the online space (sometimes administrators) put pressure on the user to conform their behavior to what is socially expected.

Comment 1
Comment 2

1 comment:

Samantha S said...

RJ,
I really like how you defined the Leviathan and norms in your first paragraph; it was very clear, concise, and understandable. I am unfamiliar with Listserv policy, but who exactly sets the norms? Is it the users collectively, or is it the administrators/founders? Besides that I think your post was a perfect example of a norm and a response to a violation of a norm. Also, this is a little off topic, but the message that was sent made me think about the feature based model where we tend to lie in explanations most in email; although the information was very intimate, how much of it can we believe? Great post!