A few years ago, I belonged to an online community that was connected through a shared interest in graphic design and interactive media, utilizing programs such as Photoshop, Flash, and Illustrator to create casual art or humorous/satiric pieces of media. We communicated mostly through the message boards on the website, with such thread topics as “Photoshop this picture,” “Virtual Graffiti” (where each person adds a new section to an ongoing JPEG file, just like a real graffiti wall, such as this one), and “Flash Puzzles” (in which you post a simplified Flash-based puzzle for others to solve – this one is probably one of the best examples of this). Besides threads about media creation, members would often post tips or tutorials to help other members of the community, or talk about meeting together in other online environments, such as in online games or collaborating on a project for online contests, such as on Worth1000.com.
Our online community was relatively tight-knit, compared to some of the current flame-ridden online spaces of today. Members generally supported each other, helped one another, and participated in external activities with each other. As in any online community, there are, of course, a few “bad seeds” that went against the majority of the community, but the website’s relatively strict code of conduct and highly active moderators usually kept the community in balance.
The definition of a community as described by Etzioni and Etzioni appropriately illustrates our group: it was defined by a social network that contained a web of relationships in which members bonded with each other, our culture was characterized by the basic elements of common ground, such as a commitment to a set of shared values, mores, meanings, and a shared historical identity. Our community was also defined by reciprocity, as members reinforced one another, especially if they needed help with a project – in fact, an entire section of the message boards was set up as a help section, where members could often find answers to whatever questions they may have had, even if it had nothing to do with media design. Members often bonded with one another – the relatively small size of our community allowed the most active members to stand out and be referenced by name in threads where they weren’t even participating, such as one particularly long and memorable thread on the community’s favorite moderators and contributors.
The leanness of CMC may have facilitated having such a rich community with a distinct group synergy. It allowed for everyone’s opinion and contribution to be heard in an asynchronous environment, where other members could take their time to come up with their best responses. This may have been helped by the selective self-presentation and impression management that is defined by CMC. In addition, the fact that everyone in the community was geared toward the same general goal to exercise our skills in media design created a social environment more like the one described by Gemeinschaft rather than by Gesellschaft – it was more along the lines of a Utopic community based on a shared focus and common purpose that contained strong interpersonal ties and a common language and identity. Through our active, and generally positive, participation, we created a community that was connected through social activities in which members were highly supportive and intellectually engaged.
Comment 1
Comment 2
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Greg, this sounds like a really supportive community for graphic designers and Photoshop addicts (myself included, don't worry). I agree this group is tight-knit, and what I believe adds to it most is the lack of graphic designers in one's offline social network. This lack of offline synergy only strengthens the desire to participate online to mediate this interest with others.
Wallace mentions in the chapter about altruism how people feel more comfortable disclosing and helping others when the group's focus is a bit arcane and hard to initially identify in others (the sexually curious, people with diseases, etc...). Your group seems to match this classification, as you mention lots of people are willing to help, in addition to holding contests and games.
Greg, first of all, great post! You did a thorough job bringing all of the social networking material together and did well in describing your particular community. I'd like to reiterate Steve's point that this online social network is largely facilitated by the fact that graphic design, for the most part, occurs in a computer mediated environment, already - much of it being done while sitting at a computer. Given that internet is so integrated into our computer use, it's no surprise that hobbies involving computers will find social networking over the internet so natural. I, myself, am a member and contributor to DeviantArt, which is a huge figure in the online graphics art world.
I'm not sure I can agree with the fact that the friendly atmosphere you experience on your forum can be directly attributed to the arcane or abstract nature of your hobby--referring to it as geeky or something. I think it's more the fact that your hobby is very personal, abstract, and self-intensive. One can look at a lot of the forums provided for online video games and note that they are overrun with flaming, trolling, disrespect, and crass humor.
The type of work that was used/ preformed in your online community was very similar to the purpose my community used a CMC networking function. Projects initiatives and a little bit of social interaction could be found in the posts. Through the work that was preformed and especially though the reciprocity on the members bonds were formed and a sense of culture was developed. As you said there was a strong sense of shared values, meanings, and identity. I liked how you noted that the fact that the environment was asynchronous and how that may have had an effect on the group dynamics. Great job on incorporating class material!
This was a really good description of how your online community successfully tied together individuals with the common hobby and skill of graphic designing. Good job with incorporating the theoretical terms in your description of your community. In terms of the friendly atmosphere, I agree that the sharing of the common ground is a big factor in the comfort level of the members being open to one another and participating in reciprocity. The members of the group do not have to be weary if others in the group will understand them or accept them because it is a given.
Post a Comment